The problem with this definition is that the concept of a modern “migrant” is not politically “neutral”. A migrant is displaced by war, famine, illness, and economic hardship – much of which stems from the disruptive foreign policies perpetuated by the political establishment. Migration is quite often heavily politicised – as the acceptance of the individual migrant is used by the government and the media – to equate to the acceptance (a priori) of the political cause associated with the migrant. Migrants from regimes the UK government prefers are welcomed with open-armed – whilst migrants from opposing regimes (or political) views are excluded. The UK has a long history of importing migrants from regimes that oppose Socialism. The government (and establishment) do not want the taxpayer to understand or grasp the real situation and reduces it instead to a simplistic “either-or” argument. The issue is twofold – rejecting the coercive political situation becomes conflated to rejecting the migrant. Rejecting the migrant is equated with an “immoral” decision.
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 